If you say so Dave, but I don't understand how comments regarding the personal traits of the 2004 candidtate (such as Bush tripping over his tongue or Kerry's horror-show looks) have any impact outside of 2004.

Face reality! YOU HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO JUSTICE!

Grow up. If Dave doesn't want matters such as economic numbers posted in this folder, then we'll just have to post it in the folder Dave wants us to. It has nothing to do with "justice", rather it's simple Dave's preference.

Dave's not saying economic conditions and other issues aren't going to impact the 2004 election, he's just saying he wants them in another folder.

Looks like your drudge thread will have to find a new home, no matter how you try to spin it.

If you say so Dave, but I don't understand how comments regarding the personal traits of the 2004 candidtate (such as Bush tripping over his tongue or Kerry's horror-show looks) have any impact outside of 2004.

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy. Like Edwards vs. Guliani, for example. How would that play out? Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?

Edwards is not a moderate. He just presents himself that way.

Yes he is.

Maybe a moderate when put up next to John Kerry, but considering where the Democratic Party was 5 or 6 years ago, he is definately not a moderate. Anyone who votes NO on banning partial birth abortion is not a moderate. Here is his rating by ontheissues.org

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy. Like Edwards vs. Guliani, for example. How would that play out? Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?